Gunman opens fire at US college

#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7246003.stm

A gunman is reported to have opened fire on students at a university near Chicago in the United States.

The local television station, CLTV, said 18 people were shot at Northern Illinois University, in De Kalb, 65 miles (100 km) west of Chicago.

Students who called in to local radio stations reported seeing a white male with a pistol and a shotgun.

Emergency services are at the scene and several people have been taken to hospital with head wounds.

Kishwaukee Community Hospital said on its website up to 15 victims were arriving for treatment, including three to four with head wounds.

The university's website first issued alerts, warning of the possibility of a gunman on campus.

"Get to a safe area and take precautions until given the all clear," it warned students.

The site then carried updates confirming the shooting and telling students to stay away or stay in doors.

The latest posting says: "Campus police report that the scene is secure. Only essential personnel should remain on campus."

Emergency hotlines and counselling are being offered for students and parents.
 
#4
The college should have declared itself to be a "gun free zone" - then it could never have happened.
 
#5
It speaks volumes about US culture that a college should even need to declare itsself a gun free zone.

Not saying all of the US is bad, but there really is a gun problem.
 
#6
Belt_Twit said:
It speaks volumes about US culture that a college should even need to declare itsself a gun free zone.

Not saying all of the US is bad, but there really is a gun problem.
WAAAAHHH!

Twit by name Twit by nature.
 
#7
If only they'd all been armed with M16s. They could have quickly formed a citizen's militia, encircled their assailant and opened fire on full automatic before retiring to the student's union for bottles of Bud and high fives all round.

Not enough automatic weapons in untrained hands - that's America's problem.
 
#8
Ancient_Mariner said:
If only they'd all been armed with M16s. They could have quickly formed a citizen's militia, encircled their assailant and opened fire on full automatic before retiring to the student's union for bottles of Bud and high fives all round.

Not enough automatic weapons in untrained hands - that's America's problem.
This is a totally ridicules statement. :wink:

Every one knows you can’t drink till your 21 so they would have to settle for high fives and more coke or dope.

And your right if they were all armed to the teeth this would not have happened.
 
#9
offog said:
And your right if they were all armed to the teeth this would not have happened.
Call me crazy...but the idea of being caught in the crossfire between Suicidal Columbine Kid, the cops, a couple of asthmatic campus security guards, and some weekend range-shooter who happens to be carrying doesn't make me feel much safer.
 
#10
All these shootings in schools must make the American Education System one of hte toughests systems in existance!!!!

Do they get Purple Hearts added to their robes on graduation?

Is there a special page on the year book.... "most likely to turn in to a gunman".

FFS.

US of A wake up!!! You have children KILLING other children. There is something fundamentally wrong there.
 
#12
Dog-faced-soldier said:
Because, of course, there is NO gun crime in the UK and violent crime in the UK NEVER involves children.
Very difficult to kill five people in a knife spree though isn't it? The issue here is not whether US children are more or less inclined to hurt each other than UK, but that US children can lay their hands on weapons capable of wreaking considerable havoc in order to do so. UK gun crime is generally gang related and targets other gun owners, it is rare that random members of the public are gunned down in cold blood.
 
#13
BiscuitsAB said:
Fcuk me its like a fire sale over there!
Yeah. Effective enemy fire. :(
 
#14
Bat_Crab said:
Dog-faced-soldier said:
Because, of course, there is NO gun crime in the UK and violent crime in the UK NEVER involves children.
Very difficult to kill five people in a knife spree though isn't it? The issue here is not whether US children are more or less inclined to hurt each other than UK, but that US children can lay their hands on weapons capable of wreaking considerable havoc in order to do so. UK gun crime is generally gang related and targets other gun owners, it is rare that random members of the public are gunned down in cold blood.
I'd lay good money that this punter will have considered himself to be in a gang of one.

Before Trip, Dogface et al say it I agree that armed students/staff/guards 'might have' or 'probably would' have resolved the situation with a lower body count. The problem is I'm sure that the shooter not having a gun would definitely have reduced the body count. I don't want to take fellow ARRSERS guns I just don't want crims and potential crims to have them.
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#15
Armed response rarely save lives, it does however deter.

That America is nuts is a given. The NRA. Doing AQ's work for them - incident by incident..
 
#16
Bat_Crab said:
The issue here is not whether US children are more or less inclined to hurt each other than UK,


Well, I think it is. These atrocities are quite a new thing. As late as the 70s, American students in rural areas used to bring their deer hunting rifles to school which would be locked up for the day then they could retrieve them later and hunt. These things are all copycat drawn out suicide bids where the suicide gets revenge on society before doing so.
 
#17
The problem is that, as proved in the UK, banning firearms does not remove them from the hands of criminals. Firearms related crime is far more frequent after the ban than it ever was before. I am not suggesting a direct link, just that banning guns has little or no effect on gun crime because, after all, criminals are by definition, acting outside the law.

If I am kicked to death by a gang of youths, knifed to death or shot, I will still be dead. People who are intent on killing will find a way.
 
#20
mac1 said:
Bat_Crab said:
The issue here is not whether US children are more or less inclined to hurt each other than UK,


Well, I think it is. These atrocities are quite a new thing. As late as the 70s, American students in rural areas used to bring their deer hunting rifles to school which would be locked up for the day then they could retrieve them later and hunt. These things are all copycat drawn out suicide bids where the suicide gets revenge on society before doing so.
There is still nothing to suggest that US children are more or less prone to acts of violence than UK children. What is obvious, however, is that once a US child has made the decision to kill he has rather more resources at his disposal.

Why there has been an increase in this sort of thing is a different matter, it is obvious that availability of firearms is not the driver for acts of violence, but it gives the assailant a much greater chance of success.
 

Similar threads

Top